103 replies to this topic

[80Bit]

z3a1ot, on 27 May 2013 - 02:02 AM, said:

What i have read so far these days leads me to believe that all the people who complain that LRMs are underpovered want to do like 700-800 damage and at least 3 kills per match. They want to do that by just staying in the back and firing volley after volley of missiles.

Now if you take a look at an average laderboard after the match is over you can see (at least what i noticed) that people tend to do about 400 damage and 1-2 kills and assists. That includes brawlers, snipers, lrm boats and so on, occasionally someone shines and does a bit more. That is pretty balanced dont you think?

Now how would it be if only viable option was lrms, if they could make huge amount of damage like some of the people ask for? Lrms only need fix to splash damage and maybe, just maybe, tiny increase to damage per missile and i think it will be ok.

Well if you read my original post, you will see that I would like my Trebuchet, which devotes 22 full tons to running twin LRM30s, to be able to at least match the performance of my other Trebuchet, which runs 5 medium lasers.

And with a "perfect" game, that LRM Trebuchet ends up with less than 400 damage, while on a more typical game, it ends up with 200-250 damage. The 5 medium laser Trebuchet runs numbers of 500+ for a great game and 300-400 for a good game.

So whatever post you are reading asking for 800 typical LRM damage, or damage greater than other builds, it is not this one.

[80Bit]

Kitane, on 27 May 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

I would gladly go into LoS with Catapult, that's why I have Tag + Artemis and that's the only moment when I can actually see if my missiles have a chance to hit or not.

Except that when I do get into LoS and put Tag on the enemy, missiles are still meh and I am painfully reminded that I would do a lot more damage a lot more quickly if I had PPCs or lasers.

Quote for truth.

I am pretty tired of people arguing that LRMs should do lower damage than other weapon systems because they can indirect fire. Anyone saying that clearly has not really played with LRMs much, because indirect fire is almost always a huge waste of missiles. Perhaps in very coordinated teams you can count on a spotter to maintain lock, but then most coordinated teams know better than to use LRMS at all in the first place.

Edited by 80Bit, 27 May 2013 - 07:36 AM.

[80Bit]

Nebuchadnezzar2, on 26 May 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:

LRM is a support weapon and need to stay that way
It must not have same effectiveness with direct fire weapon
It must not become the main killing weapon because stompy robots war is close range fighting at heart where we can witness the awesomeness of tearing each others limbs
Is lrm is good it will simply takes this away, everyone will use it and the gameplay will become pathetic

If lrm users complaint about how less damage they deal, ill say that what it is supposed to be because it takes much less effort to use lrm
I dont mind that lrm deal much damage as long as it is spread all over the body so it is not lethal. It must not be lethal

The other option is that lrm is lethal but at very very restricted ammo

The all missile game is simply boring and takes the soul away from this game. Please do not let this happen

You are very, very, very wrong. You are so wrong that you gave me a tooth ache. You are so wrong that a bird outside my window heard me reading your post and flipped out, flying into my window in a fervor. I hope you're happy.

[z3a1ot]

80Bit, on 27 May 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

Well if you read my original post, you will see that I would like my Trebuchet, which devotes 22 full tons to running twin LRM30s, to be able to at least match the performance of my other Trebuchet, which runs 5 medium lasers.

And with a "perfect" game, that LRM Trebuchet ends up with less than 400 damage, while on a more typical game, it ends up with 200-250 damage. The 5 medium laser Trebuchet runs numbers of 500+ for a great game and 300-400 for a good game.

So whatever post you are reading asking for 800 typical LRM damage, or damage greater than other builds, it is not this one.

Oh i didnt mean exactly your post. I was thinking about all those LRM threads i read these days.

I agree LRMs need more balancing but just a little bit. Many people are proposing drastic changes and that is what concernes me. That and PGI making those drastic changes is what makes us running in circles.

Edited by z3a1ot, 27 May 2013 - 07:53 AM.

[DuSucre]

Nebuchadnezzar2, on 26 May 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:

LRM is a support weapon and need to stay that way
It must not have same effectiveness with direct fire weapon
It must not become the main killing weapon because stompy robots war is close range fighting at heart where we can witness the awesomeness of tearing each others limbs
Is lrm is good it will simply takes this away, everyone will use it and the gameplay will become pathetic

If lrm users complaint about how less damage they deal, ill say that what it is supposed to be because it takes much less effort to use lrm
I dont mind that lrm deal much damage as long as it is spread all over the body so it is not lethal. It must not be lethal

The other option is that lrm is lethal but at very very restricted ammo

The all missile game is simply boring and takes the soul away from this game. Please do not let this happen

Oh boy....
That very last sentence left me... speechless....
I really do not know if I have to laugh or cry....

[Wendigo Vendetta]

DuSucre, on 27 May 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

Oh boy....
That very last sentence left me... speechless....
I really do not know if I have to laugh or cry....

Yes, the all PPC game is, on the other hand, very soulful and deep... brimming with tactical complexities and hidden truths...

[MaddMaxx]

Quote

Well if you read my original post, you will see that I would like my Trebuchet, which devotes 22 full tons to running twin LRM30s, to be able to at least match the performance of my other Trebuchet, which runs 5 medium lasers.

Can you do that damage you seek with ML's from 950-1000m's? If not, then why would you expect them to be, somehow, even allowed to be equal? That makes "zero" sense.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 27 May 2013 - 08:15 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

MaddMaxx, on 27 May 2013 - 06:44 AM, said:

That would be effective for anything that can actually run. What about all the poor buggers going sub 50 and have no choice but to expose themselves over open ground as that is where the rest of the Team went?

Yup, your right, never expose the Team to enemy fire. Perfect solution. Not sure how you kill the enemy though.

As soon as you said you were done. When they hit hard they are OP, when they don't they are UP.

Very difficult to make everyone happy, or is your attempt to just assure your own happiness and vision of game play as you see it?

Well, as I see it now, the same thing happens. LRMS do normal damage, teams boat them, they are almost impossible to dodge unless behind cover (wall humping) everyone screams LRM are OP.

PGI drops damage, LRMS become useless.

So, LRM tracking down more, lights/mediums can evade helps address 1 issue, namely medium / lights not favoured, and the second issue - that any other gun can be evaded with timing and cover and skill, thus LRMS need to be evadable in some manner. Creating a mini-game where LRMS can be completely dodged with speed, timing and jumpjets would create a new dynamic that would give players more options and force LRM teams to not just cluster together but create a flanking line setup to be effective.

How about you make a suggestion of quality to fix the LRM problem instead of just trolling about "whats a bad idea" without actually providing any kind of forethought or empirical data?

[Reith Dynamis]

MaddMaxx, on 27 May 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

Can you do that damage you seek with ML's from 950-1000m's? If not, then why would you expect them to be, somehow, even allowed to be equal? That makes "zero" sense.

Well you can potentially reach that damage range more easily with lasers. then lrms. if th chance to miss was the same mediums would pull ahead in the sense they don't run on ammo. Could you elaborate what you mean. I'm not sure what we're debating here.....

But Op was talking about the ton to ton devotion to a weapon line, its unfair that medium lasers should keep up with lrms that have to compile all the uses of BAP, Artemis, Tag.

a 1 ton weapon verse say a 7 ton lrm 15 with all other goodies should not be comparable.

Edited by Reith Dynamis, 27 May 2013 - 08:25 AM.

[Sprouticus]

z3a1ot, on 27 May 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

Oh i didnt mean exactly your post. I was thinking about all those LRM threads i read these days.

I agree LRMs need more balancing but just a little bit. Many people are proposing drastic changes and that is what concernes me. That and PGI making those drastic changes is what makes us running in circles.

This is the key. LRM's are close, very close, to being balanced.


Bump the damage from 0.9 to between 1.1 -1.3, and give another 60 missiles per ton. Do that and they will be spot on perfect.

[Nightcrept]

MaddMaxx, on 27 May 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

Can you do that damage you seek with ML's from 950-1000m's? If not, then why would you expect them to be, somehow, even allowed to be equal? That makes "zero" sense.

Come on now. You've been playing this game long enough to know that you can't hit anything with lrms past around 800 meters. Your target just back peddles till your missiles explode in air, ams knocks them down, he finds cover while playing chess or finds a ecm mech.

[Kitane]

Sprouticus, on 27 May 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

This is the key. LRM's are close, very close, to being balanced.


Bump the damage from 0.9 to between 1.1 -1.3, and give another 60 missiles per ton. Do that and they will be spot on perfect.

I really don't think the damage tuning will achieve anything at this point.
Buff them to make LRM medium/heavies viable and LRM Assaults will blow up everyone with their silly amount of missiles.
Balance LRMs around 60-70 mega salvos of LRM Assaults and medium/heavy LRM mechs or LRMs as support secondary weapons will be useless.

Feel free to kill my idea in Suggestions section.
http://mwomercs.com/...vailable-tubes/

[Nightcrept]

Kitane, on 27 May 2013 - 09:10 AM, said:

I really don't think the damage tuning will achieve anything at this point.
Buff them to make LRM medium/heavies viable and LRM Assaults will blow up everyone with their silly amount of missiles.
Balance LRMs around 60-70 mega salvos of LRM Assaults and medium/heavy LRM mechs or LRMs as support secondary weapons will be useless.

Feel free to kill my idea in Suggestions section.
http://mwomercs.com/...vailable-tubes/

You're dead on.

[Wendigo Vendetta]

Kitane, on 27 May 2013 - 09:10 AM, said:

I really don't think the damage tuning will achieve anything at this point.
Buff them to make LRM medium/heavies viable and LRM Assaults will blow up everyone with their silly amount of missiles.
Balance LRMs around 60-70 mega salvos of LRM Assaults and medium/heavy LRM mechs or LRMs as support secondary weapons will be useless.

Many people throw this one out there with the expectation that it is limited to LRMs and is some sort of great insight... it isn't either.
No Cicada (just to give an example) achieves the same thing with PPCs that a Stalker does. No Centurian achieves the same thing with ACs that the Jager does. More weapons means more damage, period. If the weapon is viable when singly mounted, it will be a bear when boated. That's an unfortunate reality. LRMs are inexplicably the ONLY weapon where this simple reality seems to cause such wailing and gnashing of teeth.
There is no reason for it. Yes, lots of missiles will do lots of damage (or should if the game is balanced). Just as lots of PPCs will hit really hard as well... more so than when mounted singly on smaller mechs. No one is daft enough to use that as an excuse for nerfing the others to the point that they are useless to mount on those smaller mechs!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Don't forget, you aren't just balancing single launchers vs multiple launchers.

So we have an LRM 15 vs 4 LRM 15's.

You also have Artemis LRM 15 vs 4 Artemis LRM 15's.

And you have TAG/Artemis LRM 15 vs. 4 Artemis/TAG LRM 15's.

Then you have TAG/Artemis/Adv. Target Decay LRM 15 vs. 4...well you get the idea.

And then you have to balance all of those versions against groups without ECM, groups with ECM, your group having BAP, mutiple AMS', single AMS.

This whole thing has turned into a giant cluster f.

[Prezimonto]

They removed the "lock required to guide" with missiles I'd be okay with their current state. If I can fire and forget missiles just like every other weapon, then they're current level of damage might need a small tweak, but they'd have a solid roll as a long range harassment tool. Boating them would be okay, but not great, but throwing an lrm10 or even 5 wouldn't fine if I could then switch targets, or duck for cover afterwards. At the least it forces the enemy to move/duck or take semi-reasonable damage.

Because you have to wire-guide in missiles they're just bad given their current level of damage. If spotters allowed for more intelligent pathing (pre-patch) it'd be better yet.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Just played my Centurion with 2 ALRM 15's for a few games. God is that a terrible set up now. And we're right back to PPC meta again.

[Livewyr]

Asmudius Heng, on 26 May 2013 - 10:31 PM, said:

Also - what does 'Support' weapon even mean?

This again comes down to a lack of vision about how LRMs are suppose to be used.

The role and concept of a weapon needs to come before the mechanics.

This may be just be personal opinion, coming from an Ex-Mortarman, but; when I think of a "support" weapon, I think of a weapon that softens up targets, or suppresses the enemy.

Target Suppression is kinda obvious. (Keep the enemy's head down.)

Softening up targets is usually related to a defensive structure or stronghold, however, I translated that to MWO as doing spread damage. Instead of doing point damage like an indirect Gauss rifle, or more accurately, an indirect LBX, doing the individual missile damage (total) over a spread area. This weakens the armor all around in a more uniform/smooth pattern, and on exposed internals it can do some crit hunting.

That is what I interpret as a "Support Weapon"

[Sephlock]

^ Do you still have all your fingers? Just curious.

[Livewyr]

Sephlock, on 27 May 2013 - 12:18 PM, said:

^ Do you still have all your fingers? Just curious.

Hehe yes, Mastered the birdman first thing when I was assistant gunner.